The "St. Michael" and its Captain.

New Zealander, Volume 5, Issue 395, 26 January 1850, Page 3

The "St. Michael" and its Captain.

We have no disposition to crush a fallen man ; but Captain Prance seems determined to keep up the discussion which was provoked at first by his own conduct, and, more immediately elicited by his own publication of an extract from his log-book referring to the wreck which he refused to put back to, near the Island of St. Paul's. The Southern Cross of yesterday has a long letter from him which, (in addition to some scolding of ourselves,) contains the following, which we transfer to our columns, as including all the substance of the writer's final attempt at self-defence. After copying the letter from Captain Travers which appeared in our last, Captain Prance say s,—~ In answer to which I would now request you to publish the following statement from my civilian passengers (voluntarily offered by them), which contradicts, in substance, the statements which Captain Travers has made to my prejudice, and will, I think, convince any candid man— willing to be convinced— that no request was made to me by any one on board my vessel to put her back to the supposed wreck : — Auckland, New Zealand, Jan. 23, 1850. Captain R. W. Prance, of barque • St. Michael.' Dear Sir, — Having seen a letter from you in the Southern Cross New»paper, and another from Captain Trateri in the NcwZealander of this day, relative to a supposed wreck of a vessel seen on our passage from England, we hereby certify, as passenger*, thnt we made no request, far less urged you. to put the veisel round, wiih the view of reaching said wreck ; nor did we hear any other passenger do so, at (In our opinion) it would have been of no use, having seen \ nothing to justify such, as no appearance of any human being existed on it ; but if such had been the cmc, our opinion is, you would without any request have done so— judging from your general kindness and attention to us all on our passage. With our best withes for your welfare, believe us to be, dear sir, Yours respectfully, | John Ruiiell, main cabin Thomas Rich, Henry Bragg, M. Rich, Robert Ray, William Browne, William Laxon, George Brag?, Caroline Bragg, jun. George Anderson, jun. Caroline Bragg, sen. It was with great astonishment, indaed, that I read the letter from Captain Travers, as it bears but too plainly upon the face of it that he is the source from whet'Ci the unfounded remaiks of the New-Zealander o-ißinaMy came. Now, however, he states that he is only '•/«% assured" that for one, he himself asked, though not, perhaps, to use the original words, "strongly urged the captain to put back." I can only say, in op).o*ition, that I am as fully assured that he never exprested such a wish to me; and I may be permitted to add, that the probability of his having done so is negatived by his own acknowledgment, *' that he did not strongly urge me." On the value of the testimonial from Captain Prance's " civilian " passengers, (as he more than once italicizes them, meaning apparently that they are more trustworthy witnesses than the military) we need not comment, farther than to notice, as a fact within our knowledge, that it Avas not " voluntarily offered," and moreover, that most of those who signed it were going on to Wellington, in Captain Prance's ship,and therefore necessarily muchin his power, as steerage passengers especially are. Were it less exceptionable in the mode of its gettingup than it is, it still would leave the real question of Captain Prance's conduct, respecting the unfortunate wreck, — just where it was before. The animus of the letter/however, is evidently one of insolence and insult to Captain Travers. That gallant officer stands so little in need of any vindication from us against such accusations as are broadly made in the foregoing extract, that we feel an unaffected reluctance in commenting upon them. It is right, however, that we shonld say, Captain Travers was not our original informant on the subject. Had he been so, who could have blamed him ? Indeed, if any blame attaches to him in the matter, it is because he did not immediately make the case public on his arrival here. — However, so far was he from doing so that he declined acceding to an application made from this office to commnnicat| information respect-

ing the statements which were circulated through the town in relation to Captain Prance's neglect of the wreck, and only came forward when Captain Prance's bold reference to him would have implicated him in the guilt of giving the assent of his silence to what he knew to be gross misrepresentation The statement of those who have signed Captain Prance's certificate of character, that they "did not hear" and other passenger urge that the wreck should be looked, after reminds us of the defence of the Irishman who when he was assured 'that five men had seen him commit the crime with which he was charged, triumphantly replied that he could produce fifteen men who would swear that they did not see him do it. It is worthy of notice also that those who have signed this certificate were (with, we believe, the single exception of Captain Prance's friend Mr. Uussell) steerage passengers, and therefore not likely to hear all that passed on the quarter-deck or in the chief cabin. We have received the following letter from one of the passengeis of the Se. Michael We may take leave to observe, as an evidence, if any were needed, of our having noticed this matter on exclusively public grounds, that we have expunged from it one or two passages, which, however true we have reason to believe they are, bear on points not immediately involved in the present matter. To the Editor of the New-Zealander. Sir,— Ai it was said by Captain Prance that I was the original writer of a letter touching the supposed wreck passed by the St. Michael near St. Paul's Island, I feel bound to contradict the statement through your valuable columns. But for the above imputation, I should have disregarded the whole correspondence— which, for the last few days, has created so great a public sensation. However much Captain Prance deems it necessary (in conjunction with his esteemed good friend Mr. Russell) to impute so unpardonable an action to me, I feel assured that no person can bring forward, either verbally or otherwise, anything that would tend to prove the assertion. It is not my intention to cast reflections or do aught that would injure any man, tharefore, shall refrain from entering iuto details as little as possible. Captain Prance, conjointly with his friend Mr. Russell, asked me to sign my name to what I was an utter stranger to, consequently, would not lend my signature for the purpose of *• screening inhumanity." The able letter in the Neio-Zealander of tha 23rd instant, written by Captain J. Y. Travers, renders it unnecessary for any further discussion on the subject ; and whatever signatures Captain Prance may hive collected, they will bo utterly useless in securing him from the public disapprobation, for his inhumanity in not tacking the •hip, for the purpose of collecting, if possible, some details of the wreck, rendering thereby a great public good. Probably it might have been pint of the missing Richard Dart ; and in «uch case, satisfaction, altbpugh a "melancholy satisfaction," would have been given to the owners. I am, sir, &c, &c, P. Campbell. Auckland, Jan; 24, 1850.

It will be seen by our advertising columns that the proposal to celebrate the anniversary of the colony by a Regatta is about to be acted on, under auspices which promise well for its proper arrangement and efficiency. This amusement, we need scarcely say, is free from many of the objections which have been urged (in our opinion justly) against Horse Racing ; and, moreover, is better suited to a colony like ours, where strength ratber than fleetness is desirable in horses which are, with comparative few exceptious, employed in farm -work, but where — from our insular position and maritime engagements and prospects, and from the fact that so large a portion of our communication with the interior is carried on through our coasting vessels — everything that tend* to the construction of better and safer boats is especially valuable. Our Regatta therefore may be found not only an agreeable recreation, not necessarily involving anything which should offend the most fastidious moralist, but also the means of doing much practical good by stimulating to augmented taste, liberality, and effort in the designing and building of boats. We therefore commend the Regatta to the notice of our readers, and shall be glad to find that it meets with that public patronage which it merits. We observe that Captain Smith of the Josephine has given the use of his vessel as flag-ship on the occasion. We have no doubt that his kindness will be followed out on his part by every courtesy and attention in his power to show to those who may visit his ship during the Regatta.